26 votes

The euthanasia that wasn’t

6 comments

  1. [5]
    cwagner
    (edited )
    Link
    Has anything recently shown so well that most many news sites just repackage content from other news sites without doing an iota of research? I did a simple google search for yesterday’s topic of...

    Has anything recently shown so well that most many news sites just repackage content from other news sites without doing an iota of research?

    I did a simple google search for yesterday’s topic of Noa’s case and found no Dutch source mentioning euthanasia outside of her being denied at the clinic (I don’t speak Dutch, I used DeepL). I found a lot of English, some German and a Spanish article claiming it was under the Euthanasia laws, though I did not see the even dumber articles mentioned here.

    Today most sites seem to have issued corrections, but it was about a full day of plainly wrong articles being up all over the world.

    I feel like this is especially relevant with more and more countries (including my own, Germany) trying to create laws against fake news.

    PS: I feel like the discussion here should not be focused on euthanasia or suicide, yesterday’s topic is more appropriate for that.

    edit: most -> many

    14 votes
    1. [2]
      Deimos
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      It's a huge problem with online journalism where all of the outlets are constantly rushing to make sure they have an article about the big story of the moment, but they don't have time (or even...

      It's a huge problem with online journalism where all of the outlets are constantly rushing to make sure they have an article about the big story of the moment, but they don't have time (or even try) to independently verify the facts. I posted this article in ~music last week when I came across it, it talks about how a random guy posted some lies on Twitter, and before long he was being quoted as a "former label executive" (he's not) on all sorts of sites, causing a big controversy that he had totally fabricated.

      Like you said, retractions/corrections get made sometimes afterwards, but they usually don't get much attention at all. I'm sure there have been many stories I've read that actually turned out to be wrong, but I didn't see the corrections, so I'm still believing something false.

      I don't even know what we can do about it. Slow news is probably the real answer overall, but it's really difficult to just try and tune out from everything. It also only helps me and doesn't really address the larger issue of all the other people still being affected by rushed, unverified stories.

      11 votes
      1. cwagner
        Link Parent
        It's the reason why, when I nowadays read any kind of surprising, shocking or in other ways unexpected news, I check HN or Reddit to have the top comment tell me why it's bullshit. HN sadly seems...

        It's the reason why, when I nowadays read any kind of surprising, shocking or in other ways unexpected news, I check HN or Reddit to have the top comment tell me why it's bullshit. HN sadly seems to have transitioned to having those comments be unsourced quite often, but on Reddit at least they back up their claims usually. And when there are no comments to that regard I spend a few minutes searching to find out what is what.

        But I must admit, this is really hard for expected news. Unless I intend to share something (in which case I always do some research to make sure I'm not sharing some bullshit), I take it as is. Confirmation bias is hard to avoid, for me, even though I already am pretty jaded regarding news articles.

        5 votes
    2. [2]
      heady
      Link Parent
      This is sloppy irresponsible journalism but is distinct from fake news which is completely fabricated stories for the purposes of confirming existing biases.

      This is sloppy irresponsible journalism but is distinct from fake news which is completely fabricated stories for the purposes of confirming existing biases.

      7 votes
      1. cwagner
        Link Parent
        Turns out I didn't know there is a special definition for fake news and only went by the meaning of the words. I removed the tag, thank you.

        Turns out I didn't know there is a special definition for fake news and only went by the meaning of the words. I removed the tag, thank you.

        2 votes
  2. Algernon_Asimov
    Link
    I know I'm coming late to this: I didn't read the articles and titles before everything was edited and corrected and revised. However, I don't understand how this wasn't reported as a suicide in...

    I know I'm coming late to this: I didn't read the articles and titles before everything was edited and corrected and revised. However, I don't understand how this wasn't reported as a suicide in the first place. When someone goes on a hunger strike, they're taking active steps to end their life. That's suicide. It's not euthanasia.

    In fact, I'm not even sure that euthanasia should ever have been a part of this story. She went to a euthanasia clinic to ask them to help her end her life, they said no, and she went away. Nothing to see here. The story is about a girl desperate to kill herself to end her mental pain, not about euthanasia.

    Some might argue that while the cause of Pothoven’s death does not meet the technical definition of euthanasia, her family’s decision not to intervene might meet some people’s interpretation of the word.

    Standing aside and letting someone commit suicide is not the same as helping them to end their life. Euthanasia requires active participation by someone else. Standing back and watching someone die isn't euthanasia - otherwise, choosing not to rescue someone from drowning would also be considered euthanasia.

    8 votes